Author
Topic: The Bryce Harper Watch (Read 128757 times)

Nationals Plan To Draft Bryce Harper?By Tim Dierkes [April 13 at 7:56am CST]The Nationals plan to draft Bryce Harper first overall in June "barring an injury or drastic change," writes MASN's Ben Goessling. However, MLB.com's Bill Ladson tweets his disagreement. The 17-year-old phenom, currently raking junior college pitching and playing catcher, is considered by the Nats to be "as surefire a talent as Jason Heyward" according to Goessling. Scott Boras is "advising" Harper, ensuring Harper's massive bonus will be fiercely negotiated.

Harper isn't viewed on the same level as Justin Upton or Alex Rodriguez, but there still aren't many players approaching his talent or ceiling in the upcoming draft. ESPN's Keith Law and MLB.com's Jonathan Mayo have scouting reports.

One guy says Nats are probably going to draft him, the other says it hasn't been decided yet. I'd say that leaves a fairly wide range of options that include just about everything, and nobody would be wrong.

I'd say you're right. I'm pretty confident in my source, but it is still a few weeks from the draft. The way it was told to me, though, is that it's almost as cut-and-dried as Strasburg was last year. And they were fairly set on Strasburg well before the draft.

I know this for a fact: They've spent a lot more time with Harper than Taillon.

I'd say you're right. I'm pretty confident in my source, but it is still a few weeks from the draft. The way it was told to me, though, is that it's almost as cut-and-dried as Strasburg was last year. And they were fairly set on Strasburg well before the draft.

I know this for a fact: They've spent a lot more time with Harper than Taillon.

I'd say you're right. I'm pretty confident in my source, but it is still a few weeks from the draft. The way it was told to me, though, is that it's almost as cut-and-dried as Strasburg was last year. And they were fairly set on Strasburg well before the draft.

I know this for a fact: They've spent a lot more time with Harper than Taillon.

Thanks. To Lodsdon's point, of COURSE they haven't "made a decision" yet, who would make a decision many weeks before the draft? You don't make a final decision until all the information is in, which means including events, history and knowledge accumulated between now and June 7. So I don't think Bill is saying anything that isn't already pretty obvious.

Thanks. To Lodsdon's point, of COURSE they haven't "made a decision" yet, who would make a decision many weeks before the draft? You don't make a final decision until all the information is in, which means including events, history and knowledge accumulated between now and June 7. So I don't think Bill is saying anything that isn't already pretty obvious.

Correct. I'm saying they're planning to take Harper, but plans can obviously change. That's different than saying they've made a decision.

Correct. I'm saying they're planning to take Harper, but plans can obviously change. That's different than saying they've made a decision.

'zactly.

Your piece makes sense, though to my knowledge you've been the first to step up with such an affirmative statement. It's been obvious to all of us impartial observers that Harper's been disappointing nobody this year, while the competition has not stepped up. How could the Nats NOT take a prospect with such upside? Yeah, I know that college players are closer to being able to contribute, but how much talent would you have to give up to get a nearer to prime time player? In 2010, so far the answer would appear to be "too much".

There are reports that the Nationals have settled on CC of Southern Nevada catcher Bryce Harper as the No. 1 overall pick. (Though there are also reports that the decision isn't finalized.) My question is, what differences will there be negotiating with him as compared to Stephen Strasburg? He has much more leverage than Strasburg did, but will he command anywhere near as much money as a result? Why hasn't the Boras Corp. weighed in on him yet?

J.P. Schwartz Springfield, Ill. I saw the conflicting reports as well. It's fair to say that Harper has firmly established himself as the best prospect in the 2010 draft, and I wouldn't be at all surprised if the Nationals have determined that he's their leading contender for the No. 1 overall choice. But this far in advance of the draft, nothing is finalized.

A year after smashing previous draft records with the bonus ($7.5 million) and contract ($15.1 million) they gave 2009 No. 1 pick Stephen Strasburg, Washington faces another potential eight-figure deal if it takes Strasburg. While Strasburg was a better prospect than Harper, Harper holds much more leverage. Strasburg would have been at a disadvantage had he re-entered the 2010 draft as a college senior or independent leaguer at age 22. Harper, however, is just 17 and would be eligible for the next three drafts if he were to return to CCSN for his sophomore year.

In some ways, Strasburg was a prisoner of his considerable talent. He was so good that he was going to get offered too much money to turn down, and all he could really do if he re-entered the draft would be to maintain his value, not enhance it. I think Harper faces the same situation. He could prove himself at a higher level were he to transfer to a four-year college in a strong conference for 2010, but he also would assume a lot of risk as well.

In the end, I believe that Harper will sign shortly before the Aug. 16 deadline, for a little less than what Strasburg got, somewhere between $10 million and $12 million. That would eclipse the highest guarantee ever given to a drafted hitter, the $9.5 million Mark Teixeira received from the Rangers in 2001.

The Boras Corp. usually doesn't make public proclamations about their advisees' price tags. Instead, those numbers seem to somehow magically appear as we get closer to the draft.

A year after smashing previous draft records with the bonus ($7.5 million) and contract ($15.1 million) they gave 2009 No. 1 pick Stephen Strasburg, Washington faces another potential eight-figure deal if it takes Strasburg.

No, crapheads, we can't take Strasburg in 2010, since we already took him in 2009.

K. Goldstein has write up about B. Harper on Baseball Prospectus. Your able to read some of it but the rest is subscription only. Here's some of the part that I could read since I don't have a subscription.

Quote

The Makeup: This should not be underrated. It's impossible to find any talent evaluator who isn't blown away by Harper's ability on the field, but it's equally difficult to find one who doesn't genuinely dislike the kid. One scout called him among the worst amateur players he's ever seen from a makeup standpoint, with top-of-the-scale arrogance, a disturbingly large sense of entitlement, and on-field behavior that includes taunting opponents. "He's just a bad, bad guy," said one front-office official. "He's basically the anti-Joe Mauer." How this plays into the negotiation or future evaluation is yet to be determined, as history has shown us that the bigger talent a player is, the more makeup issues teams will deal with. Bench players can't afford to be problems, but plenty of teams happily put up with difficult superstars.

Scouts before 2007: "The Nationals could field one of the worst teams in recent memory; they'll be lucky to win 60 games.Scouts before 2008: "The Nationals have really improved. There's a different vibe with that team, they might surprise people."